Why is that racist? It isnt. I'm not racist. You are. Your obsessed with bringing colour/race into everything. Is that all you've got? One daft comment from 6 months ago? The majority of us dont give a shit what colour/race people are. Its bigots like you that keep bringing it up. You're obsessed with trying to divide us.Didn’t see calling anyone a racist who wants to drown immigrants by shooting holes in their boats in any of them squares. See, even right wing nonsense is calling you out as a racist.
So true.
Well I guess being a teacher you've got all the time in the world havent you. Keep taking your tory pay cheque uni boy.Think I’ll make a Coventrian bingo
Why is that racist? It isnt. I'm not racist. You are. Your obsessed with bringing colour/race into everything. Is that all you've got? One daft comment from 6 months ago? The majority of us dont give a shit what colour/race people are. Its bigots like you that keep bringing it up. You're obsessed with trying to divide us.
I don’t know if you’re being facetious but infection rate and the severity of the infection are two different things. If I had to make an educated guess I would put it down to one or several of the hundreds of chemicals in tobacco smoke that is hostile to the virus. I could imagine this in particular in houses covered in ash over the years.
If you’re a regular smoker however and get infected then you’re in big big trouble. And I know I get pulled up for ‘I have a degree’ but here it’s directly relevant-I’m not just guessing
Well I guess being a teacher you've got all the time in the world havent you. Keep taking your tory pay cheque uni boy.
Well I guess being a teacher you've got all the time in the world havent you. Keep taking your tory pay cheque uni boy.
There’s so many possible variables. With my data head on (my degree) I’m wondering is the age profile of smokers in France trends younger than other countries. Some light by googling suggests 29% of students smoke in France and much less than that in the U.K. for example. Maybe our smokers are older and more vulnerable than theirs?
That’s the danger of isolating one variable in one country.
It’s the taxpayer who pays him you moron.Well I guess being a teacher you've got all the time in the world havent you. Keep taking your tory pay cheque uni boy.
I think there is something in the idea that the rank tobacco chemicals on your body and where you live would reduce the virus’ survival chances. But it needs investigation
It’s the taxpayer who pays him you moron.
This ties into a big bear of mine, don’t know if you can share any insight. When I was a poor student I looked into medical testing as a money earner and couldn’t do it as every advert said “no smokers”, I always got annoyed that they didn’t test medicine on smokers. Is that actually true or is there a set of smoker trials I just wasn’t seeing?
I think it’s for the same reason that they normally don’t allow those with very high or low BMIs-they’re just generally more at risk to secondary health problems. Studies specifically for those groups are a different matter
It’s the taxpayer who pays him you moron.
I think Sweden is taking a huge risk but it’s up to each country to try to manage the disease as best they can. If they can allow it to spread without breaching their health service capacity then who’s to say that ultimately that might not be the best decision in the long run.
The problem I can see with their strategy is the lag between restriction measures being implemented and the confirmed cases coming through (people showing symptoms and then needing hospital treatment) and whether it spreads to higher risk individuals. This is made even more difficult due to the high number of asymptomatic/mild cases ie You could start putting restrictions in place to control the spread but it could be too late as it’s spread more than you think and you’re going to breach your health service capacity anyway.
I honestly don’t think anyone will know the best solution/strategy for months or even longer. The only fact we know at the moment is we don’t have a vaccine and therefore this is around for a good while yet.
All countries can do in the meantime is try to buy some time in order for us to find out how to best to manage/treat the virus (or find a vaccine), whilst remaining within their health care capacity, without damaging the economy to the point whereby more damage is done to society than would be done by the virus itself.
Not easy
ps also, if it’s discovered that you can catch it again, there’s another layer to the mess which changes the dynamics again
I hope so. It always felt like it was “eh fuck em if there’s complications” type thing. I know there’s a sex bias in a lot of older research where only men are tested and women are treated as shrunken men, so wondered if it was the same.
If they want drugs to pass clinical trials they have to do it by the book. Not sure they always did though!
As I say above I’m not supporting their strategy but the death rates are a strange one until you know how many in the population has it/has had it. Even the best testing (major) nations haven’t really got a clue, only estimates from some relatively low number antibody sampling
If for example after testing we find out that half the population in Sweden has had it at the current number of deaths then it would put a totally different slant on the argument
I’m not saying that’s the case at all but you get the point.
This was the book I got it from, being discussed on More or Less which is an excellent programme
BBC World Service - More or Less, Missing women from drug trials
Looks interesting. Probably the most revolutionary legal drug provided though is I think the contraceptive pill
I did actually ask my mate for a blast on her fag when she came to see me yesterday, luckily she’s a good mate and completely ignored me
Facebook algorithms going in to overtime on your feed.So true.
Yeah, the minimal infections and deaths in numerous countries that locked down earlier clearly aren't a reliable measure yet against the 20k plus we've had here.
If this continues beyond June, which is not out of the question, then I think it will be increasingly hard for the government to justify paying people in non-essential jobs for not working when key workers are not only likely to be paid very little, but also are the ones who are going to have to pick up the tab for this through higher taxation in future. All furlough is doing is increasing inequality by providing big handouts for those who are already likely to be privileged.Now there is open talk of social distancing lasting all year and beyond it's going to be interesting to see what that actually means in practice while trying to get more of the economy going and how that will affect business decisions. If you run a restuarent you might be hoping you can open for table service soon. If you run a bar/club you might be thinking there's no future for you. Plus, what happens to those employees? Is furlough extended for them until then or does some more generous benefit system come into place and a lot of those people gradually change jobs into industries that are busier? What happens to industries like tourism? What about the countries who rely on it as a substantial part of their economy?
There isn't a chance that will happenNow there is open talk of social distancing lasting all year and beyond it's going to be interesting to see what that actually means in practice while trying to get more of the economy going and how that will affect business decisions. If you run a restuarent you might be hoping you can open for table service soon. If you run a bar/club you might be thinking there's no future for you. Plus, what happens to those employees? Is furlough extended for them until then or does some more generous benefit system come into place and a lot of those people gradually change jobs into industries that are busier? What happens to industries like tourism? What about the countries who rely on it as a substantial part of their economy?
It's not racist to want to drown immigrants?Why is that racist? It isnt. I'm not racist. You are. Your obsessed with bringing colour/race into everything. Is that all you've got? One daft comment from 6 months ago? The majority of us dont give a shit what colour/race people are. Its bigots like you that keep bringing it up. You're obsessed with trying to divide us.
So I'm being facetious. You've got the degree.I don’t know if you’re being facetious but infection rate and the severity of the infection are two different things. If I had to make an educated guess I would put it down to one or several of the hundreds of chemicals in tobacco smoke that is hostile to the virus. I could imagine this in particular in houses covered in ash over the years.
If you’re a regular smoker however and get infected then you’re in big big trouble. And I know I get pulled up for ‘I have a degree’ but here it’s directly relevant-I’m not just guessing
It's not racist to want to drown immigrants?
Ok Derek
Cool story david.
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
This is madness.
Why is it allowed still? You can't walk round a country park but you can queue up for a burger.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?